Hollywood, like the tobacco industry, likes to denounce criticism as “censorship” and to shield its business with the “free speech” protections of the First Amendment. Certainly, no one wants the government regulating what’s in movies.

But R-rating tobacco promotion on screen has nothing to do with the First Amendment. The reason is simple. The First Amendment limits the government’s power to interfere with content. It has nothing to do with Hollywood’s voluntarily rating its own products.

And, let’s face it, there is more than a little hypocrisy in studios claiming to be guardians of artistic freedom:

• Studios do a billion-dollar business in product placement whether the screenwriter or director likes it or not.

• Studios order screenplays re-written. Studios, not directors, control the final cut of motion pictures.
• Producers have even given tobacco companies script approval.

R-rating tobacco protects film makers against commercial pressure, a far more immediate, pervasive and persistent threat to creative independence than anything the First Amendment addresses.

Film makers need to understand their choice and accept responsibility for the consequences. Depicting tobacco use in film contributes to tobacco addiction, disease and death worldwide, increases cigarette sales, and boosts the profits of multinational tobacco companies.

In the end, of course, Hollywood should remain free to promote tobacco in its movies — so long as any such movie receives at least an "R" rating and is preceded with an effective anti-tobacco advertisement to neutralize the pro-tobacco images in the film.